(One in a series of posts on George Fredrickson’s 2002 book, Racism: A Short History.)
Why does Fredrickson spend much of the final chapter of Racism: A Short History writing about Nazi Germany, the Jim Crow South (US), and apartheid South Africa?
A justification for focusing on the admittedly exceptional and extreme cases of Nazi Germany, apartheid South Africa, and the Jim Crow South is that they taught the world a lesson about the consequences of rampant and unchecked racism that eventually changed the standards for internationally acceptable conduct. The emergence of racism as a central human rights issue during the course of the century resulted mainly from the attention paid to these regimes by people beyond their borders. Their rise and fall were major events, not only in the history of these countries themselves, but also in the history of the world. They should not therefore be considered or compared in isolation but only in the international contexts that first influenced their emergence and then contributed to their demise. The story of racism in the twentieth century is one story with several subplots rather than merely a collection of tales that share a common theme. (p. 103-104)<!–more–>
One common factor among these three overtly racist regimes is “the extent to which the racial Other came to be identified with national defeat and humiliation“. (p. 106) Hitler, the Nazi party, and other German antisemites blamed Jews—both German and international—for Germany’s defeat in World War I. African-Americans played a pivotal role in defeating the Confederate army during the Civil War, and sustaining Republican rule during Reconstruction. Africans generally supported the British in the Boer War and opposed Afrikaner self-determination.
In all these cases, the actual perpetrators of defeat and humiliation—the American North, the Allies in World War I, and Great Britain—were too powerful to be within the reach of reprisal, at least in the short run. Scapegoating the available and vulnerable Other was one way of dealing with the bitterness and frustration resulting from the failure of nationalist projects. (p. 106)
In addition to identifying the similarities among the three regimes, Fredrickson is diligent about pointing out the differences:
“The fact that Nazi Germany in the 1930s was on the path from being merely an overtly racist regime to being a deliberately genocidal one distinguishes it quite sharply from the American and South African cases.” (p. 125-126)
“South Africa after 1948 designed and constructed the most comprehensive racist regime meant to be a permanent structure that the world has ever seen. (The architects of the Nazi regime of course viewed their handiwork as the process that would lead to a society in which there would be no racial distinctions because there would be only one race.) (p. 133)
Both world wars had a significant impact on group relations in all three countries. World War I was a “shattering and demoralizing experience” (p. 117) for Germany, and its conclusion laid the groundwork for the Nazis’ rise to power. Indirectly, the war brought an end “to the age of Western imperial expansion that had provided a context for the legitimization of racial Darwinism“. (p. 114) In the United States this resulted in a chipping away at the building blocks of Jim Crow. In South Africa, the fears of the white minority led to increased controls on African workers and voters.
“The Second World War, into which Hitler plunge the world, was the climax and turning point in the history of racism in the twentieth century. It, and the Cold War that followed quickly on its heels, revolutionized the context within which groups thought of as ‘races’ confronted each other and interacted.” (p. 127)
None of the 20th century overtly racist regimes was dismantled solely, or even primarily, because of internal pressure. Nazi Germany was only defeated by the bloodiest war in human history. What Fredrickson calls “the horrible truth revealed by the liberation of the death camps” (p. 128) undermined the legitimacy of Jim Crow. The decolonization of Africa and Asia within the context of the Cold War provided powerful international pressure for the United States to dismantle it. South Africa’s apartheid regime used its anticommunist position (Marxist ideology was insistently, dangerously “nonracialist”) to win Western support, but as the Cold War collapsed international pressure on South Africa led to the release from prison of Nelson Mandela and elections on a “one person, one vote” basis.
That’s not to say that indigenous anti-racist movements had no impact, just that none of them had enough power to win in the absence of powerful international allies.
Other posts in this series include:
Religion & The Invention Of Racism In Early Modern Europe – Part 1
Religion & The Invention Of Racism In Early Modern Europe – Part 2
Religion & The Invention Of Racism In Early Modern Europe – Part 3
Science, Beauty & The Enlightenment In The Rise Of Modern Racism
Democratic Nationalism & The Rise Of Racism
Racism & The Rise Of Overtly Racist Regimes In The 20th Century
Crossposted at: MassCommons.wordpress.com
